Likelihood that California will ban the sale of chickens?

[puddle_drinker]

"by the year 2030 of “0 kg [of] meat consumption,” “0 kg [of] dairy consumption, [in]...Nearly 100 cities across the world .. American members include Austin, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Seattle.

It's not really a thing...

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-cities-did-not-sign-wef-treaty-ban-meat-dairy-cars-2023-09-13/

 

[The Moonshiner]

It's not really a thing...

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/us-cities-did-not-sign-wef-treaty-ban-meat-dairy-cars-2023-09-13/

But, but, it was on the internet. How could it not be true?

 

[IdyllwildAcres]

Where is there any attempt to ban butchering animals for food?

Not in California that I can find.

 

[IdyllwildAcres]

"fact checkers"

Well we are all entitled to our own opinions but not to our own set of facts. Facts are facts, they are provable. Unfortunately people get the two things confused or refuse to consider things that differ from their opinions that they have convinced themselves are facts.

 

[puddle_drinker]

I've been noticing how often the "fact checkers" have been completely wrong. But will look into it further, probably on the next few weeks.

Cognitive bias can be challenging... and some sources are better than others. In an open government like the US we have much more access to many sources of information and government information, unlike Russian, North Korea, etc... Look around, look at sources you don't necessarily agree with and look outside the social media echo box when you make your decisions.

 

[saysfaa]

... Look around, look at sources you don't necessarily agree with and look outside the social media echo box when you make your decisions.

I do. Also, search out my assumptions are, what they are based on, and whether they are accurate.

I invite y'all to consider that everyone has cognitive bias. I do. You do. The people working for the government who designed, executed, and published the information put out by government. The fact checkers do. As do the programers when the fact checkers are algorithms.)

 

[puddle_drinker]

Reuters says "...False. The report by C40 Cities and collaborators cited in the article does not advocate a ban on meat, dairy and cars and is not a treaty, not legally binding and not affiliated with the WEF...."

Where in my quote is treaty mentioned?
Legal binding?
The WEF?
Cars?

It seems to me that a "goal" of something is "advocating" for that thing.

The mayor of Los Angeles was the Chair of the C40 organization until 2021. He seems to have been serious since the organization spokesperson said, "During his tenure as Chair of C40, Mayor Eric Garcetti raised the bar for equitable climate action, for C40 cities, and for all of us." And, "In speaking about the group’s accomplishments at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, Scotland, on Nov. 1 [2021], Garcetti said that two-thirds of C40 Cities set and met targets that are equal to or exceed the targets outlined..." Also. "Nearly all of the c40 Good Food Cities Declaration commitments are part of the city of Los Angeles' sustainability plan, known as LA's Green New Deal. The city went even further..."

I grant that "ban" is much less clear. Some definitions say, "prohibit by legal means". Others say, "prohibit, especially by legal means". Others say "prohibit." Distinctions without difference in this context. The C40 publications say "The work reported here ...helps us to consider what policies, regulations, incentives and behavioural changes will be necessary to transition..." And "...[cities] are currently using regulatory powers or/and lobbying the operators managing [canteens of big public facilities] to abide and comply. Cities are now bringing those new procurement criteria, dietary guidelines and principles beyond the public sphere to involve privet food service operators. Additionally cities have also started involving restaurants..."

LA, specifically, is "expanding beyond city departments" by "Leading by Example, ...any department or proprietary organization with restaurants or retailers on their premises must abide by the [food purchasing program]."

I've learned a tremendous amount from the BYC forums and this thread is no exception. I've never heard of the C40 organization until now. Thank you @saysfaa I appreciate you participating in this discussion. If I've offended you in some way with my participation, it was not my intention.

Yes the city of Los Angeles seems to be making an attempt to adhere to C40 recommendations at least in spirit. The C40 food programs I've read seem to be more directed towards changing urban food systems, seemingly moving to more local food production vs. banning food types.

 

[Mar-Kea1]

Where is there any attempt to ban butchering animals for food?

Look up Oregon Initiative Petition 13. Its not the first of it's kind, and won't be the last.

 

[Brooks_]

But, but, it was on the internet. How could it not be true?

The exact same way the fact check is true.

 

[Wacochicks]

I'm in the state of California and just a few years ago they banned the sale of rabbits at pet stores. What is the likelihood that this crazy state will eventually ban the sale of chickens at feed/pet stores?

California says enough!